Oil spills into the debate

I had to laugh. This sort of thing makes it entertaining. Two whole protesters in Brisbane. David Archibald and Bob Carter went down to have a look. These folks were part of Dr. Ove’s en masse protest he fomented on his Climate Shifts blog.

Sometimes there’s just no point. Do they think ad hominem is a spice in an Arabic dip? What can you say?

Just smile and go back to doing your damnedest to work for free so that they and their children might have a bit more freedom from tyranny and a bit more of their hard earned cash in their wallet. If you succeed, they’ll probably never thank you, but it’s still a job worth doing. Cheers!

Anthony Watts, and David Archibald will be speaking in Melbourne Tuesday night. Don’t miss your last chance to see the heroes of the grassroots independent scientists. Read my thoughts on Anthony and David. Get more info from the Climate Sceptics.

========================

For the record, the tour is funded by ticket, book, and DVD sales, with guarantors for expenses that are private individuals. There’s no corporations involved. It’s being done on a shoestring, just like my surfacestations project.

I live on the gulf in SWFL, and I can tell you, ground up oiled pelicans being used as fuel, is not funny. We are now conducting test beach cleaning runs of what to do if the oil reaches us and our beaches.

I hope there are trials, then all the government malfeasance will come out. Heck we all know BP caused the spill, but we need to understand the rest of the story. Starting with how did a risky single casing well get approved by MMS?

Talking of oil… six weeks before the blowout, the White-House was told by BP that there were problems with the Deepwater Horizon well. The president, apparently, didn’t mention this fact when he recently met the families of the 11 workers who died.

What you, David and Robert and the other volounteers is doing for us, is just unbelieveable.

Its a great initiative!

Thanks Robert, David and Anthony!

Dr. Ove looked very happy. I know why. He has the resources of Governments and the media on his side. And “Science Mag.” pluss “Nature”. WWF, Greenpeace, IPCC etc et. Even BP. A formidable machine. The Borg.

What do we have? More and more ordinary people pluss scientists. Scientists who dare speak out against The Borg.

I live on Sanibel Island in the Gulf. As a biochemist in Animal and Human health areas, I felt myself obliged to volunteer for cleanup if the oil reaches us.

I received back a form letter saying my help was not allowed, because I was not trained properly. The letter also mentioned that I should keep away from the oil, as it is a “highly toxic” environmental chemical!

I am thinking twice about pumping my own gas. An oil change is out of the question. I don’t see how I can even drive a car now, since it is full of the highly toxic ingredients.

Smokey says:
June 21, 2010 at 2:11 pm
From the beginning this was a 21st.century updated alchemical method for making gold out of pouring the empty into the void or, as it was described, by issuing “carbon credits” and selling “carbon shares”.
Their ability to performing these kind of miracles is as proverbial as ours for not making money ☺

The http://www.socialist-alliance.org plays right into your hands i think… They should have themselves renamed like the SED (Sozialistische Einheistpartei Deutschlands) – they call themselves now Die Linke (The Left) which sounds… well, less socialistic.

This scientist and general skeptical and one who suffers fools poorly, would sure like to know how I can access this “gravy train”. I wounder if the protesters, who apparently well informed could tell me?

When using the global warming hoax as a stalking horse it may be an idea to actually hide behind it. Not ride on its back wearing a Che Gueuvra t-shirt, waving a hammer and sickle flag and singing the Internationale…

The Australian AGW debate has been so brainwashed to believe Big oil, big energy company, big coal, and fossil fuel is against them. The CSIRO crowd still thinks they could attack crowds by starting their articles and discussion with — big oil, big fossil, big coal and big energy generators are funding the skeptics. They think people will just get brainwashed by repeating and repeating this mantra. Some may believe all the time but they do make their own internet search. Big oil, big electricity generators and fossil companies are the one making money with the cap and trade. They have the network to distribute new energy, they could ride one the green movement (just like BP). So CRU is funded by big oil and big electricity generator, the Muir inquiry had BP big shots. Pachaury and the IPCCC big boys stays in 5 star hotels. If the AGW crowd has to gain again the public trust, they need a new mantra.

Maybe if the AGW types stayed at the YMCA they would have a closer experience of reality. From the list on the sign, what you and the Y accomplish mean that A$89 was well spent. At last an NGO with useful “direct action”.

All that big oil money I get, wowee.
David did send me a softcopy of his book, thank you David.
What intially struck me as out-of-character about the Deep Horizons explosion was that the surviving crew was sequestered from the MSM for weeks. If it were a coal-mine disaster, they’d have mikes stuck in the survivors faces for days on end.
The best foot never came forward on this whole thing.
I remain highly suspicious of at least ulterior motives.

If the Hellfire Club is still there you will probably catch 2 or 3 copies of all the Village People there… Now I am going to have to remove the YMCA ditty from my head, thank goodness for the Adamms Family. That always works.

Perhaps one day greenies will explain to us why digging up fossil fuels is ‘evil’ yet digging up copper, iron, aluminium and other ores then smelting and processing them to build windmills and solar collectors is environmentally ‘good’ ?

Oil
Follow the money
BP hires Podesta group to do its lobbying and PR => John and Tony Podesta own Podesta group => Podesta (john) owns Center for American Progress AND Climate Progress.

Looks like Joe Romm is much better connected with big oil and wouldn’t need to stretch the dollars and stay in such a small roadhouse motel.
So oil money has contaminated the Progressive blogs. Joe Romm is the beneficiarry of BP and big Oil monie$

He of course has clearly told his team where he wants the CSIRO to stand….”But the point is, why wouldn’t one take out very strong insurance to at least do what we can to future-proof our well-being? I think it’s a no-brainer.”…..

Anthony, I have contributed to your surface stations project but is there any way that I can make a modest contribution to your general expenses fund. You are doing such sterling work and I feel that I should not ride on the back of this movement without making some kind of contribution. I’m not big oil though I’m afraid.

[Reply: If you put this request into Tips & Notes, or in Contact, Anthony is more likely to see it. ~dbs, mod.]

Benenson Strategy Group – Poll
Consequently, there is a huge margin of support for an energy bill that would “limit pollution, invest in domestic energy sources and encourage companies to use and develop clean energy. It would do this in part by charging energy companies for carbon pollution in electricity or fuels like gas.”
Overall, 63% of likely 2010 voters support it and just 29% are opposed.http://lcv-ftp.org/LCV/2000cew.pdf

(full details) June 2010: Politico: Poll for League of Conservation Voters
by Benenson Strategy Group
Oil Spill and Energy Bill Update
The Senate may soon debate an energy bill that will limit pollution, invest in domestic energy sources and encourage companies to use and develop clean energy. It would do this in part by charging energy companies for carbon pollution in electricity or fuels like gas. Would you say you strongly support this bill, somewhat support, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose this bill?http://www.politico.com/static/PPM130_jb.html

Truth is: We need oil to just keep what we have going. It will take decades to switch energy sources and generation.
If Big Oil goes down in the US, we go down with it. The days of a food supply spread across the nation with railroad transportation web are long gone. Look at your grocery shelves. Imports are taking over, as Obama promised.
Big Oil will either feed us, or it will feed somebody else.
What’s it going to be?

21 June: Vancouver Sun: Mike De Souza: Study questions credentials of climate-change skeptics
The hundreds of academics who sign warnings for politicians to delay action on slashing greenhouse gas emissions do not have the same expertise as those who say human activity is causing global warming, says a new study to be released Tuesday in the Proceedings of the U.S. National Academy of Scientists…
The paper was authored by William Anderegg, a graduate student at Stanford University’s biology department, along with Jacob Harold, Stephen Schneider and Prall, in order to compare the discrepancy between mainstream media coverage of controversies or debates about global warming with the actual research in scientific journals…
The 1,372 academics were selected from scientific assessment reports as well as the prominent multisignatory public statements in support or against the mainstream theory. That list was then reduced to 908 researchers who had published at least 20 peer-reviewed papers on climate change science.
But the study found that the academics supporting the evidence that humans are causing global warming were more likely to be climate change scientists doing extensive research while the skeptics had produced less evidence to back up their claims. For example, more than 90 per cent of the climate scientists who supported the evidence had each published more than 20 peer-reviewed papers while about 80 per cent of the skeptics had published less than that amount…http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Study+questions+credentials+climate+change+skeptics/3183069/story.html

Time: Michael Lemonick: Who’s the Climate Expert Here?
So the experts agree that climate change is a real; the people who think it isn’t tend not to be experts. But will that actually sway the public?http://ecocentric.blogs.time.com/2010/06/21/349/

That settles where the $$$ has been awarded/going all these years: To Global Warming researchers.
Oh, and that’s why the climate change (nee AGW) researchers published more peer-reviewed papers: no competition.
My, how statistics can be bought.

Henry Chance say: “Oil Follow the money BP hires Podesta group to do its lobbying and PR => John and Tony Podesta own Podesta group => Podesta (john) owns Center for American Progress AND Climate Progress.”

John Podesta selected BO’s transition team, picked his senior white house staff, found his cabinet members and got all his Czars for him.

Tony and John Podesta’s other client in their lobbying firm is NBC Universal, which is owned by GE, which owns the Smart Grid technology that CA just passed a law setting it in place.

Follow the money goes even higher than the Podestas, all the money comes from George Soros’ support for the Center for American Progress. Last fall, I think, George Soros invested $900 million in PetroBras (Brazil’s govt owned, very profitable oil company). Several days later, the Obama admin guarantees a $2Billion dollar loan or loan guarantee to PetroBras (if they are so profitable why do I have to guarantee loans to them?) The moritorium on all oil drilling in the gulf is for deep water drilling, deep water defined as 500 ft. Deep Water Horizion was drilling in 5, 000 ft and PetroBras will be drilling in up to 14, 022 ft or maybe that is meters, cannot remember. That doesn’t matter, but the point is we stopped all drilling because it is too risky, but we support drilling elsewhere that is deeper and riskier. And for whom? George Soros’ shareholders and the Brazilian govt. If oil is so bad to the Progressives, why support it anywhere? Such hypocrites.

When the oil drilling rigs get rented and moved to other countries and the oil rig workers lose $330m/mo in wages, and 67,000 out of work in LA, and we won’t be able to get the rigs back for years and years, our economy and the domestic oil industry will be ruined. George Soros will be making millions on his investment helped along by his puppet administration.

@Pat, I’ll put my math and observation abilities against their computer models any day, regardless of their level and focus of their education. Having a doctorate doesn’t mean one can’t be wrong, it means it took them an awful long time to get a job and become useful and productive. To this day, some still haven’t and insist on making up fantasies like the rest of us did when we were about 10 y/o.

Oh yeah, that reminds me. At the ICCC, I was expecting a free gasoline card and maybe a gold plated cigarette holder in the goody bag. No such luck – I think some killjoy replaced them with a non-regulation size hockey stick (i.e. small enough to nearly fit in the bag), four DVDs, and a bunch of climate articles. I don’t need more
reading, I have more reading than I can keep up with! Gas cards? That’s something I could use!

You work on a shoestring, you have no government grants,you will never win the nobel prize,you will never receive a knighthood/CBE/OBE/KBE keys to and city and no honours from the UEA/royal society/nasa or benefit from any of the establishment buy off schemes.
Your hard work and selfless devotion to the truth and your almost impossible struggle against the well funded and powerful vested interest groups is a David and goliath battle against fanatical political establishmentarians who will stop at nothing to destroy you. The media either ignores you or twists your words or allows your enemies to poison your work.

Yet we who follow your efforts and those who contribute hold you in greater esteem than any so called hero of the establishment with their fake awards and false status as pimped by a corrupted media.
The true hero requires no nobel prize or buy off grant money, all the grant cash and fake awards in the world cannot and never will buy the truth.
Fight the good fight not because its easy or you will gain the passing gratitude of the clapping seals/establishment chatterati but because it is the right thing and the right thing was never easy nor should it be.

Al,
BP as being “the most dangerous oil company in the world” – ‘av a larf Mate! how about placing any of the next few way above BP or any of the majors for that matter:
PDVSA, Venzuela’s state oil Co; CNOC, China; Any from the list of Russian supergiants….etc…kill far more but bury the news.
Remember, the rig’s BOPs failed. The rig and it’s BOP stack was owned and maintained by Transocean. Who delivered a dividend recently. And are viewed as American as apple pie, even if they’re registered as Swiss (Halliburton are registered in Dubai, are they an Arabian Co?)

I listened to the BBC this morning and laughed: “the sceptics have been proved wrong … there is a consensus …. a majority of experts(?) in the field agree than mankind is partly responsible for global warming”.

In other words, a majority agree that mankind isn’t the sole cause of the small upswing. A majority are not prepared to say: “this is the greatest disaster facing mankind”, a majority have retrenched to the basic physics that CO2 is a IR blocking gas so its increase ought to raise temperatures.

AND A MAJORITY CAN’T AGREE HOW MUCH!!!

This makes them a complete laughing stock. In real science, the longer you wait, the more evidence you get in, the tighter your error bars and so the more certain you are of the result. In climate “science” it is the opposite way around. The more real evidence that comes in the more apparent it is that they haven’t a clue what they are talking about and the wider the evidence forces the error bars until they are completely meaningless.

Ric Werme says:
” No such luck – I think some killjoy replaced them with a non-regulation size hockey stick (i.e. small enough to nearly fit in the bag)”
But was it carved from bristlecone pine or Yamal larch? That would be a keeper! Straight to the pool room!

I believe the whole ethos of alarmism is to bounce us into an ill thought out hasty and ill judged series of actions without stopping to consider the wider ramifications and waiting until more information can be gathered.
It certainly seems that the alarmist believers demand that we take a leap into the dark based on faith rather than reason and caution. The ethos demands with incresingly shrill urgency that we should not think but act without thinking. Rational and reasoned caution is missing replaced with a foolish desire to gamble with our very future based on kneejerk emotional frenzy.

The so-called study led by Mr Anderegg of Stanford University is nothing more than a fairly dim-witted attempt on the part of the authors to ‘be real scientists’. The study , if it were designed by Year 11 students at high schools in the UK would be failed by most teachers here who know a little about survey design. For the warmers to say that this study is anything more than what it is, a simplistic and badly-designed attempt to be a self-fulfilling prophecy, actually defines the low scientific standards accepted by the authors of the paper. And if it’s okay for a ‘computer support worker’ to be listed as a co-author on this paper, why do similar job titles on the sceptical side of the ledger become a minus in the authors’ estimation of ‘credibility’.

For me, Judith Curry’s slightly droll and understated comment about the study is right on the money – ‘unconvincing’ indeed!

Can I add my thanks to Anthony, the WUWT team and all those who share quality posts with the on-line community. A new piece of personal education every day!

I like Malcolm Chapman’s question to Mr. Watts. “Are you coming to England anytime soon?” I think it would be marvellous for our cause if Mr Watts could do a lecture tour across the UK. I see a friendly organisation arranging a series of high profile lectures/debates in the major cities across the UK , and as news from the UK is distributed and read more than from any other country worldwide, the publicity would be tremendously valuable. We could ensure that press coverage is distributed worldwide. We could invite support from people like Lord Lawson (no relation) and other high profile supporters. We might even invite the pro. lobby like AL Gore and Doctor Hanson!! The cost of course would be borne by the usual big business!!! but if that was not forthcoming, we could cover it by an appeal to bloggers and blog readers. I would like to hear the views of others and particularly of Mr., Watts himself.

Ironically, BP has in fact paid millions to lobbyists — to agitate for climate change legislation! They want the government to force us to buy their inefficient “green tech.” This is commonly known as “rent-seeking behavior” or “corporatism.”

I would bet dollars to doughnuts AGW alarmists have gotten more money from Big Oil than skeptics. In fact, I’ll bet they’ve gotten more than ten times as much.

Why is it that nobody cries “Big Wind stooge!” or “Subsidy chaser!”? Surely these represent equally if not more serious corrupting influences.
______________________________________________________________
How about Big OIL Central Banker Shill? st

The political activists in favor of AGW are either very uninformed or have hidden agendas. They do not real care about AGW as long as it pushes their agenda ahead. Marxism and Socialism do not consider lying about the truth or the facts dishonorable if it will advance their cause.

John Dewey, Father of modern education in the USA stated:“…There is no God and there is no soul. Hence, there are no needs for the props of traditional religion. With dogma and creed excluded, then immutable truth is also dead and buried. There is no room for fixed, natural law or moral absolutes.” – (Rondald Nash, The Closing of the American Heart: What’s Really Wrong with America’s Schools, United States: Probe Books, 1990, 91)

So where did the current political push for the environmental/AGW originate? In Elaine Dewar wrote in Toronto’s Saturday Night magazine:

“It is instructive to read Strong’s 1972 Stockholm speech and compare it with the issues of Earth Summit 1992. Strong warned urgently about global warming, the devastation of forests, the loss of biodiversity, polluted oceans, the population time bomb. Then as now, he invited to the conference the brand-new environmental NGOs [non-governmental organizations]: he gave them money to come; they were invited to raise hell at home. After Stockholm, environment issues became part of the administrative framework in Canada, the U.S., Britain, and Europe.”http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg106963.html

So where does Maurice Strong stand as a CO2 emitter? Well if you thought Al Gore was a hypocrite, Strong has him topped by a mile. He is the biggest source of CO2 emissions in Canada!

“…Ontario Hydro, an industrial concern, headed by Earth Summit secretary general Maurice Strong, which is the biggest source of CO2 emissions in Canada. This corporation is currently selling nuclear reactors to Argentina and Chile…. “ (Remember Strong is also the one who had everyone anti-nuclear in the 70’s and 80’s) http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/27/061.html

Strong’s life long ties to oil started in 1953 in Saudi Arabia where he worked for the Rockefellers. At age 29 he became president of Power Corporation, he has served as president of energy companies such as Petro-Canada and Ontario Hydro, and was on the board of industrial giant Toyota. In 1981 he had moved on to Denver as oil promoter AZL Resources with arms dealer Adnan Khashoggi. He is a huge political donor, not just in Canada, but in the USA to both the Republican and Democratic parties. Strong sits on boards with the Rockefellers, Mikhail Gorbachev and chairs private meetings of CEOs, including Bill Gates. He hobnobs with the world’s royalty, with dictators and despots. He is Senior Advisor to the World Bank too. http://www.taxtyranny.ca/images/HTML/Maurice-Strong/article1.html

Maurice Strong is in Beijing China working for CH2M Hill.
CH2M Hill, is “an employee-owned multinational firm providing engineering, construction, operations and related services to public and private clients in numerous industries on six continents. CH2M HILL offers integrated services that help …”

I want to know what we are supposed to use instead of oil? Planes, trains and tract0r-trailer trucks don’t run on wind, or solar or electricity. Neither do our passenger vehicles nor does farm equipment.

Wind and solar can be used to generate electricity. This may reduce our use of coal and natural gas, but it won’t make much difference in oil. A good portion of the oil we import also goes to manufacturing as raw materials for plastics and related products.

So it appears to be a study by the NAS, as in National Academies of Science; but it also appears to contain NO science at all; but is as ad hominem attack on any who disagree with the MMGWCC that the NAS promulgates; in order to continue the government research funding gravy train.

The article also has the temerity to certify that the authors have no conflict of interest.

So there’s Dr Stephen H. Schneider of Stanford; the very epitome of a conflict of interest; trying to defend the indefensible; his invention of “Climate Sensitivity”, without which, there would be no need for all of these statistical mathematicians who swill at the public trough fed by “Climate change” propaganda.

But isn’t it odd that the NAS would put out an article which is nothing but an ad hominem argument against those who disagree with their view of the science of climate; and not say anything at all, about that science that is the material under dispute.

And for Schneider to claim to be without conflict of interest, is at best laughable.

But check it out; I have a ticket to the full paper; but I am not planning to read it; since it contains no climate science.

“The website of one such NGO, the Nature Conservancy, has been bombarded with complaints from donors horrified by the discovery (although it had never hidden the fact) that over the years it had received around $10m in gifts of cash and land from BP”

Anthony, if you saw hotel rooms I’ve spent weeks on when travelling in Bolivia, at $3.00 the night (my Exxon budget didn’t allow more than that), you’d shoot your brains out before entering those “hotels”.